Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jessica Hong
dblp:166/1415
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers |
Information retrieval · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Information retrieval › ranking › multi-objective ranking
fair ranking |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2021 Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank · SIGIR 2020 |
Information retrieval › ranking
learning to rank |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2021 Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank · SIGIR 2020 |
Information retrieval
retrieval models and ranking |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank · SIGIR 2020 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.3 | 2 | 2021 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank (Extended Abstract) · IJCAI 2021 Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank · SIGIR 2020 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
unbiased estimator · 1.9learning to rank · 1.0online learning · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-Rank (Extended Abstract)abstractRankings are the primary interface through which many online platforms match users to items (e.g. news, products, music, video). In these two-sided markets, not only do the users draw utility from the rankings, but the rankings also determine the utility (e.g. exposure, revenue) for the item providers (e.g. publishers, sellers, artists, studios). It has already been noted that myopically optimizing utility to the users -- as done by virtually all learning-to-rank algorithms -- can be unfair to the item providers. We, therefore, present a learning-to-rank approach for explicitly enforcing merit-based fairness guarantees to groups of items (e.g. articles by the same publisher, tracks by the same artist). In particular, we propose a learning algorithm that ensures notions of amortized group fairness, while simultaneously learning the ranking function from implicit feedback data. The algorithm takes the form of a controller that integrates unbiased estimators for both fairness and utility, dynamically adapting both as more data becomes available. In addition to its rigorous theoretical foundation and convergence guarantees, we find empirically that the algorithm is highly practical and robust. Marco Morik, Ashudeep Singh, Jessica Hong, Thorsten Joachims |
IJCAI | 3 |
| 2020 | Controlling Fairness and Bias in Dynamic Learning-to-RankabstractRankings are the primary interface through which many online platforms match users to items (e.g. news, products, music, video). In these two-sided markets, not only the users draw utility from the rankings, but the rankings also determine the utility (e.g. exposure, revenue) for the item providers (e.g. publishers, sellers, artists, studios). It has already been noted that myopically optimizing utility to the users -- as done by virtually all learning-to-rank algorithms -- can be unfair to the item providers. We, therefore, present a learning-to-rank approach for explicitly enforcing merit-based fairness guarantees to groups of items (e.g. articles by the same publisher, tracks by the same artist). In particular, we propose a learning algorithm that ensures notions of amortized group fairness, while simultaneously learning the ranking function from implicit feedback data. The algorithm takes the form of a controller that integrates unbiased estimators for both fairness and utility, dynamically adapting both as more data becomes available. In addition to its rigorous theoretical foundation and convergence guarantees, we find empirically that the algorithm is highly practical and robust. Marco Morik, Ashudeep Singh, Jessica Hong, Thorsten Joachims |
SIGIR | 3 |
| 2019 | Bridging Research and Clinical Care: Real-Time ePRO Adverse Event Real-Time Reporting in a Phase II Breast Cancer Study
Adam L. Asare, Smita Asare, Amrita Basu, Sue Dubman, Mitra Rocca, Aheli Chattopadhyay, Jessica Hong, Lisa Weiss, Ruby Singhrao, Amy Wilson, Garry Peterson, Devon McCabe, Jeff Matthews, Cal Collins, Karyn DiGiorgio, Bev Parker, Susie Brain, Diane Heditsian, Laura Esserman, Michelle Melisko |
AMIA | 7 |
| 2018 | From eSource to OneSource: Process and Quality Improvements in the I-SPY 2 Trial
Aheli Chattopadhyay, Adam L. Asare, Jessica Hong, Thomas P. Bechtold, Michael A. Ibara, Mitra Rocca, Alexander Koorkoff, Karen Kimura, Laura Esserman, Irene S. Dubman |
AMIA | 3 |